An independent journal about the Gannett Co. and the news industry's digital transition
Please note that I'll be mostly offline all day Tuesday, so I'll be moderating comments in advance of publication. I'll read and post them as quickly as I get Web access. Thank you for your patience.
I would venture to say at most papers there are few if any "copy editors." At The Times in Shreveport when we had a copy desk, they edited copy, proofed pages, designed pages and posted online updates throughout their shifts. They did this for years.
How many amateur mistakes can you find in this Florida Today video? It's comical!http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDcQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.floridatoday.com%2Farticle%2F20130226%2FSPORTS%2F302260014%2FPay-play-could-wide-impact-Brevard&ei=os4sUd6lOeH4yAGN8IC4Dg&usg=AFQjCNFtTlahmrLi77k8mGGsjScAclNjuQ&sig2=mz103PJICabzAsb3sVW4eA&bvm=bv.42965579,d.aWc
I couldn't get past her holding the mike over her shoulder! Plus it didn't load well so there was a lot of break ups. I don't watch their videos anymore for they only repeat what's in print. To me, that's wasteful.They just had an editor talk up people's videos and their own on his column. Gannett must be losing the digital war if they keep having to have editors spend their precious columns advertising and all but defending digital.
There's no solid evidence that video drives traffic to our sites, but corporate continues to push video, with monthly video-view targets that increase by a percentage over the previous month. If someone explains to me how this focus will 1. increase revenue and 2. gain or regain the loyalty and interest of our audiences, I'm on board. I'm not being snarky. I genuinely want to understand how the video push will stablize the USCP properties' situations.
Flavor of the day. Gannett did a big video push five or six years ago, when they actually spent money on real video equipment, versus the bullshit iPhone videos of today. And editors actually spent time editing the videos then.
Gannett announces quarterly dividendMCLEAN, Va., Feb. 26, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Gannett Co., Inc.'s (GCI) Board of Directors today declared a dividend of 20 cents per share, payable on April 1, 2013 to stockholders of record as of the close of business on March 8, 2013.http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gannett-announces-quarterly-dividend-161100613.html
Copy editors are saviors when they're on. Too many are asleep at the wheel.
I heard that corporate IT is doing security scans to see if we've been hacked like NYT, WP and Bloomberg. Anyone know if they've found anything?
No, I don't know. Anybody who does know isn't going to say. I guess we'll have to leave it there.
ABC edits out Michelle Obama claim that Chicago teen was killed by an ‘automatic weapon’
Media outlets are their own worst enemy as in this instance; ABC ran the full quote online all while editing pieces within it on television to "save" time. For an industry that routinely argued that, nothing cleanses like light, the light so many internet entities that have directed on the main stream media is why it increasingly struggles.Time to return to sticking to just the facts on record, unedited ones too.
Anything solid on Phoenix layoffs or is that just someone trying to stir the pot?
"BEST BUY" making big cuts. They are starting with all managers. To bad Gannett doesn't do the same.
Thanks to companies like Gannett, the meaning of the word "layoff" has changed over the years.How many laid off Gannett or USA Today employees got rehired after the Great Recession? I would say the percentage of rehired workers is less than 1 percent.While the company might have had legitimate concerns about ad revenue and circulation decreases, too many people were laid off. And they all weren't dead wood or burned out. I would love to have many of them back because the skeleton staffs at my site are running on fumes.What I observed during 2008-2010 was a thinning of the herd that was unnecessary and too often driven by vendettas or personal grudges. In other words, it was open season on anyone who ever questioned their boss or rubbed someone wrong in the elevator.The layoffs were actually firings. Many who lost their jobs did nothing wrong other than not work harder at becoming the teacher's pet. Some who were laid off were actually threats to insecure higher-ups who weren't comfortable in their own abilities or didn't want their faults exposed by these "malcontents."Well, those malcontents were often the moral backbone of Gannett -- not that the words moral and Gannett often belong in the same sentence. Those rebels were the people who took pride in the product and often had the skills and experience to prevent embarrassing errors.I am not saying that a certain percentage of folks who lost their jobs weren't up to par. I am just saying that Gannett was wrong to let let notoriously bad managers decide who survived and who didn't. Some of the people retained simply have no ability or commitment to journalism, but they in good favor for whatever reasons. We're probably going to pay for that for many more years.
Whoever that is, the poster, that's the most accurate, and by far most eloquent description of this disaster that I have ever seen on this blog. Thank you.
I'll second that. The site managers at Gannett have free reign to dump who they want, and often their own insecurities and ineffectiveness led them to dump their best workers. Just be a bully and put them on a PIP. And it hasn't changed even after they thinner the herd.
2:01 Hit the nail on the head. The problem is company wide.
Oh, grow up. You have an industry that's half the size it was a few years ago and rapidly disappearing. Yes, OF COURSE that necessitates a significant, permanent reduction in force, and means laying off some good people. If you think you can make better decisions, then by all means go out and get a job someplace where they put you in charge.P.S. I've been working a long time, and for as long as anyone I know knows, the word "layoff" has referred to a RIF, whether the latter is meant to be temporary or permanent.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Well said 11:16. You hit the nail on the head. As usual with USA TODAY layoffs, the only ones who get fired are reporters, not the assignment editors.Take all the firings by the new geniuses in SPORTS. Many of the folks laid off were the best performers -- and biggest producers -- in the SPORTS section. But a couple of assignment editors took the opportunity of the restructuring to settle scores with reporters they didn't like or who didn't kiss enough ass. Well, you get what you pay for. Now, nobody there can break an egg. They either just aggregate stuff from around the web or have some moronic blogger shoot his mouth off.During the next, inevitable round of layoffs, the incompetent hatchet-men now running SPORTS will come for these same assignment editors who stabbed their people in the back. It couldn't happen to a nicer bunch. But if history proves anything, they'll fire the wrong people -- again. The same sycophants will hang on to their jobs. The few editors left who really made the section go will be shown the door. Their biggest hire, Joe Posnanski, saw the writing on the wall and got the hell out of there as fast as he could. The NYT, Washington Post and WSJ are laughing at these clowns.
"The Tribune Company has hired investment banks to weigh a sale of its top newspapers, including The Chicago Tribune and The Los Angeles Times, the media conglomerate said on Tuesday. "The company, which emerged from bankruptcy late last year, has retained JPMorgan Chase and Evercore Partners as advisers, said Gary Weitman, a spokesman for Tribune. "Mr. Weitman said the move was prompted by unsolicited expressions of interest in the newspapers from various suitors." -- NY Times One has to wonder why Gannett's board of directors hasn't lived up to its fiduciary duty to shareholders and similarly hired an investment banking firm to lay out its options of maximizing share value. GCI shares are down 77 percent from their 2004 high, yet management and the board continue to fumble along with unimpressive acquisitions and head-shaking strategies. Instead of running individual papers and stations into the ground through outsourcing and cost-cutting, GCI should be soliciting buyers while there is still something to sell. Tribune says it received offers that weren't solicited. The same is undoubtedly true for Gannett properties. Under the current program of sitting on its hands, Gannett is shrinking its properties into oblivion.
I know for a fact there are people interested in buying some Gannett papers, but the G board hasn't "lived up to its fiduciary duties" because they are a group of rubber stamps and can't think for themselves.
Everything is always for sale at the right price. You're nuts if you think — in a dying industry, in the year 2013 — that anybody's going to offer more for any local franchise than Gannett thinks it can milk out of same in whatever time is left.When and if such an offer ever did materialize, you better believe that that property would be gone in a heartbeat. But those days are long over.
Gannett has lead from behind in the industry following the Tribunes companies business model all while continuing to decline. The only thing that saved them last year was broadcasting due to the Olympics and the Presidential Elections. Money in the Company doesn't even trickle down to the employees it has been shut off.
For my part, I did get a call to come back. But it was the usual ream. Come back on "probation," WTF!, starting wage, 25 years of decent reviews on file, well known to my former clients, well known among the survivors of Gannettland. I passed. It's not worth my health... which is now better than it has ever been.
You left out the part about your thriving business, which you refuse to name.
Sorry to disappoint, 10:51. Your insinuation is really annoying. I don't have a thriving business. I'm "refusing" to name anything. I merely stated that I received an offer to return, totally unexpected and likely rare, which I declined. And my health is back to, well, health! The place was killing me. Seriously. The stress was considerable. Why would you resent my choosing health over stress, 10:51? Perhaps you should reconsider your values and their assumptions.
1:29 really? Is that even any way to treat people? What a toxic work culture.
Yikes. WOW. You made a good choice.
no gannett newspaper property could be sold. Theres nothing left all functions done elsewhere,
Another night of horror from the incredibly unreliable CCI system. The entire Gannett system was down for nearly two hours tonight. So much for putting all your eggs in one basket. I bet line editors spend nearly half their time now dealing with Newsgate quirks and slowness. Makes you feel real productive.
Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe in a reader